Interstate 87 (NC-VA)

[NJRoadfan]

The sign pictured was still intact back in May. NCDOT seems to take a really long time to replace damaged or missing signs though. The Exit 1D signs on I-440/US-1 South were missing for quite some time (they semi fixed it with a LGS) and they finally replaced the missing sign at Exit 2 for Western Blvd (that one took over 5 years!).

[sprjus4]

There's been a lot of support / interest in the corridor from the HRTPO's Freight Transportation Advisory Committee, and the latest mention of I-87 in Virginia comes from their September 25, 2019 meeting where an update was presented, though I've not been able to find anything on what specific "updates" were talked about as there's been no minutes published. If previous minutes from meetings by the FTAC are any indication, minutes from this meeting will be released sometime in January - February 2020.

The minutes from the September 25th meeting were finally posted today by the FTAC.

IV. I-87 UPDATE

Information item presented by Barbara Nelson, POV: Interstate 87 is planned as a 213-mile limited-access highway connecting the Raleigh-Durham area with Hampton Roads. The proposed corridor — which would connect with I-64 at the I-464/Chesapeake Expressway interchange in Chesapeake — was officially designated as a future interstate in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) in 2015. Portions of the corridor have already been completed in North Carolina, including a 13-mile segment in the Raleigh area.

The port met with representatives of North Carolina in September to discuss options on the alignment options for extending I-87 into Virginia. A contingent from North Carolina met with a member of the Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board and the Chief Deputy Commissioner to discuss the importance of improving the transportation system for health and safety reasons related to evacuations related to weather events and for economic development opportunities. The port has approached the City of Chesapeake TTAC member to discuss next steps in identifying a regional discussion. An update will be provided to the FTAC as regional discussions develop and are available for reporting out.

Realistically, I'm not sure what other alignment options would be available besides upgrading US-17 to interstate standards between the North Carolina state line and Cedar Rd, then utilizing the existing Dominion Blvd freeway north of there to connect to I-64. 5 interchanges would need to be constructed along the existing at-grade segment at Ballahack Rd, Cornland Rd, George Washington Hwy, Scenic Pkwy, and Grassfield Pkwy (that's going to be an interesting squeeze), and the interchange at I-64 would need to be expanded to handle increased southerly traffic, though granted it needs to be massively expanded yesterday regardless of what happens with I-87, it's a bottleneck as is. To maintain property access and local street connections, about 3 to 4 miles of local frontage road would also be needed along US-17 in addition to the interchanges.

[sprjus4]

The HRTPO (Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization) has released their Draft 2045 LRTP (Long Range Transportation Plan) Candidate Projects list that will be evaluated for potential inclusion in the Final 2045 LRTP.

Two projects that regard the I-87 corridor in Virginia were included in the candidate project list.

• I-87 --- From Chesapeake Expressway (I-64/I-464/US-17 junction) to North Carolina border --- Upgrade to interstate standards --- Source: FTAC (Freight Transportation Advisory Committee), Public Survey, Additional Public Submission, Chesapeake, VPA (Virginia Port Authority)
• I-64/I-464/US-17 Interchange --- Improve I-64/I-464/US-17 interchange --- Source: Public Survey, Additional Public Submission, VDOT

Draft 2045 LRTP Candidate Projects - https://www.hrtpo.org/library/view/596/draft-2045-lrtp-candidate-projects

[Beltway]

The HRTPO (Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization) has released their Draft 2045 LRTP (Long Range Transportation Plan) Candidate Projects list that will be evaluated for potential inclusion in the Final 2045 LRTP.

An LRTP is unconstrained in that there is no cost estimate, and some transportation professionals call them a "wish list."   Hopefully they won't drink the Kool-Aid especially when it is spiked with Ipecac.  This wasteful project would not be of any real benefit to SE VA.

[sprjus4]

An LRTP is unconstrained in that there is no cost estimate, and some transportation professionals call them a "wish list."

You claimed last year that there was no interest with HRTPO, VDOT, and not apart of any long range plans, etc.

It has been added onto the draft candidate projects and was recommended by the Freight Transportation Advisory Committee, the City of Chesapeake, the Virginia Port Authority, and public survey.

There is certainly active interest locally for such a highway connection.

In the future, if this project gets incorporated into the LRTP, there will likely be further study done on the corridor, including an EIS with different alternatives, impacts, and detailed cost estimates.

By the Tar Heel State.

It is not even on the radar yet with VDOT or HRTPO or HRTAC as far as being on any TIP or CLRP or ULRP.

[Beltway]

Those politicians are deceived by spirits of Deception, Error, Delusion and Leviathan.

[sprjus4]

I-87 could boost the Hampton Roads economy, but it's years away

If you've driven from Norfolk to Raleigh, North Carolina, in the past few years, you've probably seen the signs.

On that iconic green background, capital white letters proclaim: "FUTURE INTERSTATE."  Signage for future Interstate 87 has been installed along both U.S. 64 and U.S. 17 in North Carolina during the last few years.

The North Carolina Department of Transportation changed 11 exit numbers in May on U.S. 64 in Wake County from the 400s to single and double digits to reflect the future interstate.

Those signs could be a prelude to economic success for not only Hampton Roads and the Research Triangle in Raleigh, but the rural expanse of North Carolina where much of the interstate would pass through, according to economic leaders. Still, the road has to get built first – a process the North Carolina Department of Transportation said could take up to 20 years.

"We're really excited about the potential,"  said Joe Milazzo, executive director of the Regional Transportation Alliance of Raleigh. "Virginia is certainly a prosperous state. North Carolina, too, but we have a chance for both states to do better."

The interstate of about 180 miles would follow U.S. 64 from Raleigh to the town of Williamston, then U.S. 17 between Williamston and Chesapeake. The U.S. 64 portion of the road is already in pretty good shape, Milazzo said. The entire section is freeway, and only relatively minor improvements are needed to bring it up to interstate standards.

U.S. 17, on the other hand, is where the bulk of the time-consuming renovations need to happen – anywhere from $849.7 million to $945.2 million in improvements, according to a 2018 feasibility study. Those non-freeway sections would potentially need "widening, upgrade, or (a) new location,"  the study said.

The economic benefits of the road could also be enormous – a total impact of $3 billion and more than 4,000 new jobs along the North Carolina highway, according to 2013 study completed for the Highway 17 Association.

The road could also help shipping companies save gas and money by trucking material from the Port of Virginia to the Raleigh area, said Norfolk economist Bob McNab.

"This, to me, seems (like) a fairly straightforward infrastructure investment that I think would bring significant returns for not only Hampton Roads in general, but specifically the port by reducing transportation costs to the south,"  McNab said.

Chesapeake, for its part, has already poured resources into road improvement projects. One project widened 3.8 miles of Dominion Boulevard from two to four lanes; construction of the Veterans Bridge began in 2013. The project cost almost $400 million and took more than four years to complete.

There's no official timeline for the interstate. The upgrades would need to happen section-by-section, Milazzo said. Construction of the section from Elizabeth City to Virginia could start by 2024, North Carolina General Assembly member Bob Steinburg told The Pilot in October 2016.

Milazzo said stakeholders, from state and local governments to businesses and residents, need to stay invested in the highway for the upgrades to happen in a timely manner.

"Quick wins are good as well,"  he added, referencing the sign installation process.

[Beltway]

If you've driven from Norfolk to Raleigh, North Carolina, in the past few years, you've probably seen the signs.

No, because this elongated US-17/US-64 route is not the route that people take for that trip. 

U.S. 17, on the other hand, is where the bulk of the time-consuming renovations need to happen – anywhere from $849.7 million to $945.2 million in improvements, according to a 2018 feasibility study. Those non-freeway sections would potentially need "widening, upgrade, or (a) new location,"  the study said.

If that is true in 2015 dollars, try inflation-factoring it out to 2045 at even a very modest (by heavy construction standards) 5% per year and it will be at least 3 times that expensive.  At 8% (reasonable), 4 to 5 times that figure.

[sprjus4]

No, because this elongated US-17/US-64 route is not the route that people take for that trip. 

If you're in Chesapeake, it's actually not that much "elongated" , and I've actually found it as a reasonable alternative as opposed to heading into I-64 traffic, the High Rise Bridge, the Suffolk Bypass which is quite full and has had slowdowns at peak hours, the stop-and-go urban area west of Suffolk which can be a bottleneck at peak hours, and avoiding 50 miles of I-95 which can become stop-and-go on peak weekends. All of that combined can easily add 15-20 minutes to your trip, depending on time of day. For me anyways, taking US-17 avoids all of that, and has fairly light traffic immediately from leaving without having to enter the urban traffic area.

All of this is speaking from experience from taking both routings. It's usually 50-50 depending on the situation and time of day.

Why do you assume -nobody- takes this routing?

Also, keep in mind the segment between Raleigh and I-95 is also apart of the corridor, and future interstate signage is posted along that stretch, and the segment from I-40 to Wendell has been designated as I-87. You'll see the signs regardless of how you chose to make the connection to Norfolk east of I-95. All former I-495 signage has been removed entirely.

[goobnav]

Those politicians are deceived by spirits of Deception, Error, Delusion and Leviathan.

Coming from the capital of the Communist, I mean Commonwealth of VA, don't know if I should laugh, cry or be scared.  NC will build I-87 and VA will build it's part as well once it reaches it, maybe someday I-895 will exist someday as well, despite being pointless but, it is what it is.

[sprjus4]

maybe someday I-895 will exist someday as well, despite being pointless but, it is what it is.

As far as usage and traffic volumes goes, that roadway is more of a "vanity"  interstate highway than I-87 is. It's out of the way to have any decent purpose, and has a high toll.

[The Ghostbuster]

Are there any Interstate 495 signs remaining between Interstates 440 and 540? And is there any likelihood the 495 designation might reappear in the future?

[goobnav]

Are there any Interstate 495 signs remaining between Interstates 440 and 540? And is there any likelihood the 495 designation might reappear in the future?

Not on the BGS's but, there are side roads, New Bern Ave for one that still have I-495 shields posted.

[Beltway]

No, because this elongated US-17/US-64 route is not the route that people take for that trip. 

If you're in Chesapeake, it's actually not that much "elongated" , and I've actually found it as a reasonable alternative as opposed to heading into I-64 traffic,

Well, if you are at the bottom of the city of Chesapeake, that may be the case.  There would be considerable backtracking.

But the puff-piece said, "if you've driven from Norfolk to Raleigh."  A metric like that basically focuses on the core of the area, say within the H.R. Beltway loop.  Throw in the I-264 corridor to the oceanfront if you want. 

So 22 miles longer and 22 to 25 minutes longer depending on the latest Google Maps calculation.

[Beltway]

maybe someday I-895 will exist someday as well, despite being pointless but, it is what it is.

As far as usage and traffic volumes goes, that roadway is more of a "vanity"  interstate highway than I-87 is. It's out of the way to have any decent purpose, and has a high toll.

17,000 AADT is considerable enough, and it obviates having to use I-64 and I-95 thru the center of the city, or in my case obviates having to use VA-76 and VA-195 both of which have tolls.

I just yesterday used Route 895 both ways on a trip to the airport area, and I live on the VA-150 corridor.

[Beltway]

Those politicians are deceived by spirits of Deception, Error, Delusion and Leviathan.

Coming from the capital of the Communist, I mean Commonwealth of VA, don't know if I should laugh, cry or be scared. 

That describes the current state government.  Spirits of stupidity and dumbness as well.

Sic semper tyrannis.

[tjcreasy]

maybe someday I-895 will exist someday as well, despite being pointless but, it is what it is.

As far as usage and traffic volumes goes, that roadway is more of a "vanity"  interstate highway than I-87 is. It's out of the way to have any decent purpose, and has a high toll.

17,000 AADT is considerable enough, and it obviates having to use I-64 and I-95 thru the center of the city, or in my case obviates having to use VA-76 and VA-195 both of which have tolls.

I just yesterday used Route 895 both ways on a trip to the airport area, and I live on the VA-150 corridor.

895 provides a very significant time savings for anyone that lives on the south side of Richmond or Chesterfield Co.  When I lived in Chesterfield, 895 was a godsend and well worth the toll to avoid I-95/64. 895 also provides mobility options to an area that is underserved by highway infrastructure.

[sprjus4]

17,000 AADT is considerable enough

15,000 AADT between I-95 and VA-5, then dips to 7,000 AADT between VA-5 and I-295. Not too many people utilizing the entire roadway as a bypass.

Well, if you are at the bottom of the city of Chesapeake, that may be the case.  There would be considerable backtracking.

I'm south of I-64, but not at the bottom of the city. Getting to I-64 is a quick 5 minute drive up VA-168, and is usually easy to access. When I've traveled the US-17 / US-64 corridor headed south, I'll usually take VA-168 up to US-17, then head south on US-17 into North Carolina, traversing the entire corridor from I-64 to the border through Chesapeake. Otherwise, I'll take I-64 towards Bowers Hill from VA-168 over the High Rise Bridge, then US-58 west to I-95 / I-85.

So 22 miles longer and 22 to 25 minutes longer depending on the latest Google Maps calculation.

It's interesting, because after looking at those estimates, and really any time estimate from Google on any routing, the numbers never seem to add up. I'm not saying US-17 / US-64 is faster than US-58, but Google seems to estimate a speed faster than the speed limit on many routings. For instance, Google estimates it takes 70 minutes to travel 69 miles from I-664 to I-95 along US-58, an average speed of 59 mph. Based on a chart utilizing the existing speed limits by section I completed earlier this year, that time should be roughly 76 minutes. Keep in mind this is also excluding any of the 9 traffic signals along the corridor, most of which are clustered just west of the Suffolk Bypass, then a few more scattered between there and I-95. You could easily add 5 minutes or more waiting at signals, which has happened to me hitting some long red lights in the past, notably just west of Suffolk. A reasonable estimate for the drive between I-664 and I-95 would be around 75 to 80 minutes, give or take a few.

The next section is I-95 between US-58 and US-64, roughly 54 miles long. Google estimates 45 minutes, which is accurate. So between I-664 and US-64 via US-58, a safe estimate utilizing posted speed limits and factoring 9 traffic signals and an urban area, is around 120 - 125 minutes, give or take a few, compared to Google's overall estimate of 115 minutes.

As for US-17, Google currently estimates 95 minutes for the 96 mile stretch from I-64 / I-464 to I-95 along US-17 / US-64, an average speed of 61 mph. Based on a chart utilizing the existing speed limits by section I completed earlier this year, that time should be roughly 100 minutes. Keep in mind this is also excluding any of the 11 traffic signals along the corridor, which are all relatively spread out, 2 in Chesapeake, 2 in Hertford, 3 in Windsor, 2 in Williamston, and the rest in rural areas. You could easily add 5 minutes, without any lengthy delays as none of these signals are in densely developed areas such as Suffolk. A reasonable estimate for the drive between I-64 and US-64 along US-17 would be around 100 to 105 minutes, give or take a few. If completed to interstate standards, and a 68 mph average speed (because of 17 miles in Chesapeake likely max 60 or 65 mph), this would reduce to about 84 minutes, 16 to 21 minutes faster.

The next section is US-64 between US-17 and I-95, roughly 51 miles long. Google estimates 45 minutes, which is accurate for constant 70 mph speed limit. So between I-64 / I-464 and I-95 via US-17 / US-64, a safe estimate utilizing posted speed limits and factoring 11 traffic signals, is around 145 - 150 minutes, give or take a few, compared to Google's overall estimate of 140 minutes.

If you assume a starting point at Downtown Norfolk, you would add 5 minutes, 5 miles for the US-17 / US-64 option for using I-464. and 11 minutes, 9 miles for the US-58 option for using I-264.

So ultimately, today, from Downtown Norfolk to I-95 / US-64 via...

US-17 / US-64 ... 150-155 minutes, 153 miles
US-58 / I-95 ... 131-136 minutes, 123 miles

From Downtown Norfolk, a 20 mile difference, and a 14-19 minute difference, assuming no traffic on either interstate. I-264 has seemed to be more problematic, especially the tunnels and congestion around them, whereas I've rarely seen any congestion I-464. Somebody immediately leaving Downtown Norfolk to the south at peak hours could easily opt to take US-17 / US-64 over paying the more expensive tunnel toll, waiting in congestion, plus the urban congested area west of Suffolk and the busy Suffolk bypass, and only adding ultimately a few minutes of travel time overall, and very minimal traffic leaving the area. It is a lot easier and less congested on I-464 and US-17 than I-264 and US-58 heading south/west at peak hours, and again, this is speaking from experience traveling both highways at peak hours.

If I-87 was completed today, it would be roughly 134 minutes, 153 miles via that corridor using the times and distances calculated out above, offering comparable travel times to US-58, faster depending on origin location, congested areas (such as leaving Downtown Norfolk, I-464 and US-17 often less congested than traveling thru the tunnels which is often a bottleneck itself, again speaking from experience), and offering a corridor without any traffic signals, without urban areas such as west of Suffolk, and a constant 70 mph speed limit.

I'm not claiming I-87 will fully eliminate US-58's purpose and usage, it certainly won't, but it would be a viable alternative out of the area, and is certainly not "vanity". If I lived along the I-64 or I-264 corridor on the eastern side, I could easily see that route as more attractive than US-58, not only bypassing interstate congestion, but avoiding congested arterial portions, traffic signals, I-95, and being able to maintain an interstate speed, 70 mph, the whole way, despite the additional distance.



Would you consider the entire length of I-17 between Phoenix and I-40 "vanity"?

[Beltway]

17,000 AADT is considerable enough

15,000 AADT between I-95 and VA-5, then dips to 7,000 AADT between VA-5 and I-295. Not too many people utilizing the entire roadway as a bypass.

So?  The most important section is the James River bridge and that was the bulk of the cost to construct.

Laburnum Avenue is a 4-lane arterial continuation of the VA-150 and Route 895 middle circumferential route, and that connection is at the interchange that includes VA-5.

So 22 miles longer and 22 to 25 minutes longer depending on the latest Google Maps calculation.  [Norfolk-Raleigh]

It's interesting, because after looking at those estimates, and really any time estimate from Google on any routing, the numbers never seem to add up. I'm not saying US-17 / US-64 is faster than US-58, but Google seems to estimate a speed faster than the speed limit on many routings.

I never see routings on Google Maps that are faster than the speed limit.  Handwaving.

Those are the numbers that I have gotten in the past, including on a detailed spreadsheet a year ago.  Average of 62.0 mph on the US-17/I-64, and 62.3 mph using US-58/I-95.  Keep in mind the long section of 70 mph I-95.

Google Maps doesn't even include US-17/US-64 when running those two cities, you have to click and drag the line to get it.  That shows how worthy is their consideration / recommendation or lack thereof.

If I-87 was completed today,

Could, woulda, shoulda.  If it happens at all, 2045 or later.

[sprjus4]

Google Maps doesn't even include US-17/US-64 when running those two cities, you have to click and drag the line to get it.  That shows how worthy is their consideration.

Which is strange considering it will show I-95 to I-64 as an option, despite being an hour longer. I've taken that routing once, specifically to clinch I-95 between Emporia and Petersburg, and would never do it again.

Those are the numbers that I have gotten in the past, including on a detailed spreadsheet a year ago.  Average of 62.0 mph on the US-17/US-64, and 62.3 mph using US-58/I-95.  Keep in mind the long section of 70 mph I-95.

Sounds right. From the Berkley Bridge to Nash Community College, located off of US-64 just west of I-95, I had gotten 61.8 mph, 2h 12m along I-95 / US-58, and 62.1 mph, 2h 32m along US-17 / US-64.

Roughly 54 miles of 70 mph along the former routing, and 69 miles along the latter routing.

Again, future, assuming 60 mph entirely in Virginia, and 70 mph entirely in North Carolina, 68.9 mph, 2h 17m for a completed interstate.

[Beltway]

Google Maps doesn't even include US-17/US-64 when running those two cities, you have to click and drag the line to get it.  That shows how worthy is their consideration.

Which is strange considering it will show I-95 to I-64 as an option, despite being an hour longer. I've taken that routing once, specifically to clinch I-95 between Emporia and Petersburg, and would never do it again.

I have never seen that routing.  The other secondary routings I have seen are several that involve Murfreesboro.

[sprjus4]

Google Maps doesn't even include US-17/US-64 when running those two cities, you have to click and drag the line to get it.  That shows how worthy is their consideration.

Which is strange considering it will show I-95 to I-64 as an option, despite being an hour longer. I've taken that routing once, specifically to clinch I-95 between Emporia and Petersburg, and would never do it again.

I have never seen that routing.  The other secondary routings I have seen are several that involve Murfreesboro.

The other routing I've seen, though not currently showing, is US-64 to NC-111 to NC-11 to US-13 via Ahoskie. I've never seen anything to Murfreesboro, that would dump out in Franklin.

If I was traveling between Tarboro (where NC-111 splits) and Norfolk, I would opt for US-64 / US-17 over the secondary routings, despite being 10 minutes slower, since the former is all 4-lane roadway whereas the latter is mostly 2-lane and dumps on the west side.

I've done Norfolk <-> Greenville, population 180,000, a few times, and the best routing, which is never shown on Google, is US-17 to US-64 to NC-11, all 4-lane divided highway. Google only recommends secondary routings for that in order to save a few minutes, which is not worthwhile in my opinion.

[Beltway]

Google Maps doesn't even include US-17/US-64 when running those two cities, you have to click and drag the line to get it.  That shows how worthy is their consideration.

Which is strange considering it will show I-95 to I-64 as an option, despite being an hour longer. I've taken that routing once, specifically to clinch I-95 between Emporia and Petersburg, and would never do it again.

I have never seen that routing.  The other secondary routings I have seen are several that involve Murfreesboro.

https://i.ibb.co/zfNwVyG/Raleigh-To-Norfolk.png

I have no clue as to how they would produce something like that, but it does show 68 miles and 56 minutes longer.

I see that US-58 and I-95 are noted "this route has tolls."  Did you program it to also show routes without tolls?  Because "Norfolk" goes thru a toll tunnel to get to US-58 and the Dominion Blvd. bridge toll to get to US-17.

No tolls using I-95 and I-295 and I-64 to downtown Norfolk.

[sprjus4]

I see that US-58 and I-95 are noted "this route has tolls."  Did you program it to also show routes without tolls?  Because "Norfolk" goes thru a toll tunnel to get to US-58 and the Dominion Blvd. bridge toll to get to US-17.

No tolls using I-95 and I-295 and I-64 to downtown Norfolk.

The picture shown is a routing without any special programmed features. If you select "avoid tolls", it will not show any routings that involve tolls. The picture shown was merely entering "Norfolk" and "Raleigh" in the routing box, and the two options shown.

[sprjus4]

When I mess with where the routing starts on the southern end, sometimes it will indeed show US-64 / US-17 as an option.

This particular routing originates on the US-64 freeway west of I-95, ending in Virginia Beach at the Oceanfront.